In Apperson v. Kaminsky, decided Friday by the Missouri Supreme Court (opinion by Justice Paul Wilson, Apperson sued his ex-romantic partners Kaminsky and Norman for defamation (see the intermediate appellate decision for more factual details):
After [their] involvements ended, Norman told more than one person Apperson raped and abused her, and Kaminsky told others (in person and through an extensive social media campaign intended to reach those with whom Apperson dealt personally and professionally) that Apperson stalked and raped her, was a serial rapist and serial abuser, was restrained from coming within 500 feet of her, and threatened to kill both her and Norman.
As a result of these statements, Apperson was confronted in his home by a group of people (several of whom were armed) supporting Kaminsky and Norman. Because of this confrontation, Apperson was forced out of his home for seven months. Kaminsky’s statements also resulted in Apperson being asked not to patronize a local coffee shop, being made to disassociate himself from two organizations he founded, and losing a speaking engagement. Finally, Apperson was involuntarily removed from shared office space after Kaminsky told the management Apperson raped her and insisted management take action against him….
Missouri precedents, unlike those in many other states, require evidence of actual damages in a reputation case; damages may not merely be presumed. The trial court read those precedents as also requiring that …